Hi!
On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller than the minimum.
The following patch fixes that. If TYPE_MAX_VALUE is smaller than
TYPE_MIN_VALUE, the array is empty a
On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller than the minimum.
The following patch fixes that. If TYPE_MAX_VALUE is
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus wrote:
>
> On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
> >static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1]=2.0e+0};
> > That is an invalid RANGE_EXPR where the maximum is smaller tha
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:16:40PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus
> wrote:
> >
> > On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase the Fortran ICE emits
> > >static real(kind=4) a[0] = {[0 ... -1
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:34 PM Jakub Jelinek wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 12:16:40PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Tobias Burnus
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On 25.03.22 09:57, Jakub Jelinek via Fortran wrote:
> > > > On the gfortran.dg/pr103691.f90 testcase
On Fri, Mar 25, 2022 at 01:13:06PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> > Also, I think typically in the Fortran FE side-effects would go into
> > se.pre and se.post sequences, not into se.expr, and this routine
> > doesn't emit those se.pre/se.post sequences anywhere, so presumably it
> > assumes they d
I ran into this bug in the handling of clauses on the combined "masked
taskloop" OMP directive when I was working on something else. The fix
turned out to be a 1-liner. OK for trunk?
-Sandracommit 17c4fa0bd97c070945004095a06fb7d9e91869e3
Author: Sandra Loosemore
Date: Wed Mar 23 18:45:25 2
I've got another patch forthcoming (stage 1 material) that adds some new
diagnostics for non-rectangular loops during gimplification of OMP
nodes. When I was working on that, I discovered that the Fortran front
end wasn't attaching location information to the tree nodes
corresponding to the va
This patch adds Fortran support for OMP 5.1 "canonical loop nest form"
and non-rectangular loops. The C/C++ and middle-end support is already
present except for some missing constraint checks in the gimplifier,
which I've added here. There's still a TODO with respect to the
not-yet-implemente
